Main menu

Post navigation

Canon 5D Mark III VS Nikon D800 Image Quality – DXOMark Sucks Balls

I’m beginning to have some serious doubts about the future development of the intelligence of our species these days. Seriously. I thought we were making progress but boy was I wrong. Seems like people are getting dumber by the day, especially the Nikon morons. I thought it was pretty clear from my last post that the image quality of the Nikon D800 was fucking awful compared to the 5D Mark III. And not just for stills, but also for movies. The one argument people keep throwing at me every time is that you should down sample the D800 images to the size of the 5D Mark III images to do a fair image quality comparison. It’s fucking pointless to have to down sample images to compare image quality, since the higher megapixel images have more resolution for a reason – people expect to make bigger prints that will still look sharp. But you’d be surprised by the sheer number of fucking morons who don’t seem to get it.

Just to entertain them, I had already done a comparison between the D800 and the 1DX where I had down sampled the D800 images to 18MP in order to “make it a fair comparison” according to the Nikon fuckwads. And the result? The 1DX still kicked the D800’s ass!!!

Now, let’s take a look at the D800E images downsampled to 22MP and compare them to the 22MP images from the 5D Mark III. I chose the D800E because images from the D800E are slightly sharper compared to those from the D800. So I’m even giving the piece of shit D800 an advantage here.

For this comparison I’m going to use JPEG images from The Imaging Resource. You can find these samples by visiting their Comparometer. We’re going to look at the image below:

Sample from The Imaging Resource

Remember that for this comparison the D800E images are down sampled to 22MP to match the 5D Mark III.

Check out the noise on the D800 image. And why is the 5D Mark III image sharper? Where’s the goddamn fucking resolution on the D800 everyone’s talking about???

See that??? Not only is there more noise present on the FUCKING DOWN SAMPLED D800 image, but the 5D Mark III image even seems to be sharper with more detail in some areas!!! All the detail on the D800 gets fucking blurred by the noise reduction, and even then there’s still a lot of noise present in the end! BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!

What a fucking joke, Jesus Fucking Christ. God dammit. What a goddamn fucking joke. And what you’ve just seen happens at all ISO values. Remember that this is an image from the D800E, it’s as sharp as it gets for the D800! So you tell me: Is this fucking marginal increase in resolution worth all the extra noise you’re seeing in the images above????? Is it worth the fucking huge diskspace eating files??? Is it worth the slow frame rate??

But think of this, how in God’s name did those cocksucking morons at DxOMark reach the conclusion that the D800 is better at high ISO compared to the 5D Mark III?????? HOW GOD DAMMIT??? HOOOWWWWW?????

Weht jest wan bombaclad minute here, mon! Dees nuh look irie tuh me!?

Dem people ah DxOMark ah fuckan eediats!! A wha kinda fuckery da?!?!

But seriously, the sight of these results on DxOMark instantly had me cursing like Joe McNally. Just WHAT THE FUCK is going on here? It should be fucking obvious to anyone that the 5D Mark III image quality is better compared to the D800. How the fuck does DxOMark end up with results showing better low light performance for the D800?!?!?!?!?! Especially when their own fucking noise graph shows otherwise??????????

And where’s the press for fuck’s sake???? I only saw Dan Havlik from PDN briefly mention this on Twitter a while back. The press had better start questioning DxOMark about this fucking mess.

Honestly, if I was a heart patient I would have fucking died by now. In fact my blood pressure hasn’t been this high since the great 1D Mark III debacle of 2008. If it’s not fucking Canon Inc. that’s pissing me off, it’s the goddamn fucking morons in this God forsaken industry.

I’m going to get fucking wasted now. Any more of this and I’ll end up in fucking intensive care tonight.

I was once told that people who are secure and confident just let the negative bounce off of them harmlessly. Those who are under confident in their abilities (or equipment) will start screaming and stamping their feet at the slightest criticism.

If you are happy with your equipment then you would just smile and carry on. The fact you are having such a dummy spit and tantrum indicates what?

You obviously aren’t confident in your equipments abilities so stop fighting it. Go buy yourself a Nikon and calm down, you will live longer!!

Dude, get a clue about normalization and scientific comparison. Get some reading glasses so you can actually see what you think you are talking about. And get a clue about 100 other things you rant on about otherwise your decrying the future of the intelligence of my species will remain simply laughable.

And BTW I’ve been shooting Canon since the days of FD mount lenses so don’t even think about calling me a Nikon troll.

There are a LOT of great things about the 5D3, but the sensor simply isn’t as good as the one in the D800! It has around 2.75 stops worse dynamic range at ISO100. And Canon DSLR division has willfully turned away help from other Canon divisions to help improve dynamic range. They just don’t even want to bother! And without outside help, might not even be able to. Heck the ISO 100 dynamic range is even a trace worse than the 5D2! And it’s definitely worse in that regard than the even older 1Ds3! In fact, it has the worst read noise per photosite at ISO100 of almost any DSLRs since the old 30D era. And there are dozens of real world, RAW file demonstrations of the difference if you need to see that and not just raw data.

On the other hand, they did make the sensor more efficient at photon capture. It now has very roughly tied for the best normalized luminance SNR with the D800, D3S and D4. It scores lower on DxO low light shooting because Canon made the color filter array more color blind than Nikon did, just look at the record low metamerism index score of the 5D3, so that explains that. The D3S resolution is so low, that in practice, I think it looks worse at high ISO than the others so I’d knock that off the top list at this point, with a finer photosite pitch you have more for delicate NR engines to work with. (And don’t forget that if you want to toss away normalization and other relevant factors then your precious 5D3 suddenly comes in behind the D4 and old D3S.)

And of course the D800 has more MP so you can put more detail on distant wildlife (very helpful) and capture more fine landscape detail (nice, but it’s not like 22MP is lacking horribly or anything!). The huge ISO100-400 dynamic range deficit is the more worrisome in my mind.

In video mode, the 5D3 does have much better SNR than the D800 (at least 1 stop and quite possibly 2 stops better) and the D4 video, well, that isn’t even worth mentioning hahaha, so bad. In 1080p mode, the D800 pulls out more fine details than the slightly soft 5D3 but suffers from small bits of aliasing and, at times, troublesome degrees of moire that can produce weird fake colors popping up and dancing around fine details in a most distracting manner, the 5D3 is more or less free of aliasing and entirely free of color moire. The D800 720p mode has nasty aliasing, awful while the 5D3 720p, while rather soft indeed (D800 720p is soft too) is considerably more free of that nasty stuff. The 5D3 forgot to put in a nice non-line skipped 1920×1080 1.6x cropped and a super-zoomed video mode though and they tend to love NR instead of a natural look, which is a shame. The D800’s 100% view during movie shooting is tragically choppy though. Canon forgot to put in focus peaking and zebra tripes for exposure blow out, pretty sad after three years of development (even hackers added to 5D2 faster), likely due to Canon marketing hyper-protectionism (very short-sighted and foolish!).

The D800 has excellent dynamic range below ISO 800. But that’s really all it has going for it. If you shoot landscapes and studio only, hey get a D800. Be limited. Everyone else who takes pictures everywhere should get a 5D Mark III. And if you plan on shooting video, the D800 sucks balls.

Why don’t you grow a set and stop whining like a little girl.? If your so sure your correct why don’t you challenge DXo Labs as a professional.? It’s quite obvious your expertise far out ways their methods, research and expertise.
Your gratuitous use of foul language automatically disqualifies what ever knowledge you may or may not possess. Grow up 2 year old tantrum thrower!

Like you know anything about cameras? I fucking challenged DXO Labs with at least 5 posts. Let them answer me you fucking moron! THEY CAN’T!!!!!! Even the fucking press is scared to talk about it, even while a lot of people know DXO sucks balls.

talk normal then it is more easy to understand your point. I have 5d mark2 and d800 and I prefer 5d mark 2 because no lense is good enought for d800 most good lense go up to 20 mp. in use and workflow d800 is not so good as 5d mark 2. but if I had lense there could use 36 mp then I would prefer d800 but I didnt see such lense

I just bought a D800 and I am so disappointed. My Sony compact Cybershot HX9V pics are better to look at than the D800! I am tempted to spend 1500 on a better lens but afraid to in case the D800 still gives bad results. None of the
shots I take are sharp and colours are shabby no matter what lens I use the results really are rubbish, grainy, blurry, washed out colours, dreary etc. Wish I had read the nutters review before buying the D800. What a bastard idiot I have been.

I have repeated your test using The Imaging Resource test images, but came to a very different conclusion.

I started by processing the ISO3200 RAW files and then down-sampled BOTH images to 20MP. What I saw was that the 5DIII had less noise but also showed less detail. By applying noise reduction to the D800 image it was possible to match the 5DIII image in both noise and detail. The opposite of course is not possible – there is nothing that you can do to the 5DIII image to match the detail of the D800.

When you up-sample BOTH images (I used 8000×5333 = 43MP), instead of down-sample, it is clear that the D800 is the better camera. The image shows more detail and a more pleasing fine grain noise pattern.

So I would say advantage to the D800, but only marginally so.

At ISO100 it is a completely different story though. The D800 beats the 5DIII in detail and dynamic range by far. Period.

To have a fair test use the correct raw program in nikon use the capture Nx! If you do that you will see the most perfect image you can find in dslr world! Ps try to pass one image to the equivalent to 80mp with Nikon d800 and print it! with the correct image treatment It will be incredible!
But with nikon is normal check this image from D80 at 17mix: http://vlbphoto.deviantart.com/gallery/?catpath=scraps#/d2xbkk9

At the end of the day measurements and numbers does not determine image quality which is usually very subjective. For this reason I would try both cameras and I did. I fell in love with the 5d3 files and many will prefer the D800. I think we should stop relying on stupid DXO figures as they do not tell the whole picture- period!

People like you make me laugh. It is great to see some people go off the deep end just because others do not have the same view. It is great entertainment. Your expletives, however, cost you all the authority and legitimacy you may have had.

What a sad commentary on logical and reasoned argument. Go read a basic book logical argument (the foundation of Western society and sciences) and you’ll see why your use of expletives greatly diminished your credibility. Its not even great entertainment- disgusting and sad to think that people can be entertained by such low-browism.

Profanity and anger is an anti-sell. Photographers investing $10s of thousands in pro photo gear look for dispassionate, fact-based sells. And other factors, like how the body performs at normal lighting and ISOs, lens sharpness and image quality, build quality and so forth.

It’s not often that I find myself in shooting situations that call for ISO beyond 1600 or 3200. Lighting equipment usually comes into play at that point, to maintain color balance and picture quality. I’m frequently shooting wildlife, field macro work and street photography, and it’s the pricey f/2.8 lenses that make the shot, both for sharpness and brightness. In fact, _any_ noise from higher ISO is an image killer for my type of work, and I imagine that’s the case for most pro photographers.

As for five or six digit ISO, well, the 5D mkIII has the makings of an excellent surveillance camera. For PIs working spousal infidelity cases, spies and investigators working in low-light situations, that sort of thing. What else those ISO levels are suited for, I haven’t a clue.

You know chuck you need to stop cursing and by the way I have a 5D MK 3
and i love it. I agree with most every thing you say canon has much better color and more detail in shadow areas . I purchased a D 600 and the colors were awful.

I like the 5D Mk III Images a lot more, and you save a ton of disk space. If you compare a Medium Format Back at the D800 level there is no contest, the Nikon just looks terrible in detail compared at low ISOs. However it does win in features, speed and high ISO, but then why do you need so many MP when you will down-sample in the end? A 28MP camera with better noise handling would have been a more sensible approach.

Now Fake Chuck go call Maeda and wake up those video engineers up! How come the 5D Mk III has the video detail at 1080p of a 720p camera? The GH2 easily out-resolves it in video even when shooting at 720p and the 5D III at 1080p. I just hope they don’t get that blurry low detail video with the 7D mk II and or 650D, 70D. 5D Mk III rocks in low light but detail wise it looses to a $700 over a year old camera, the GH2.

I was looking for some interesting, fresh, honest, not fake and real rewiew about this two faking cameras: I found thisone very interesting. Ok Canon wins, but tha fack! I get here and the first thing I see is thousands of Canon lens all over th facking place. This is not “above parts” I think…
by the way: afther 15 yeras FUCK NIKON you let me down!

dont you think there’s something wrong with how you interpret the results? or how you do comparisons? it seems like yours is the only comparison that’s yielding different interpretations or explanations from the results. Mansurovs’ comparison of the D800 when downsampled gives less noise than the 5D3 and I would bet my ass off that he’s a better, way better reviewer than you are. I have to admit that at their max MP count the 5D3 is better in terms of noise but there’s a reason for it and it doesnt take a scientist to figure that out, just brains. No offense but I think there’s terribly something wrong with what youre doing or just happy to confuse people.

Jesus Christ man, use your own eyes for once!! I have spent time putting the images next to eachother for all of you, for fuck’s sake, you just have to use your eyes man. Are you going to believe Mansurov or DxOMark or your own goddamn eyes???? Dear God, what have I done to deserve this?

What you’ve done to deserve this? Ranting and screaming instead of arguing. Yelling that a downsampled image of mod. X looks worse than a 100% image of mod Y. That’s really essential information for a photographer who spents 80% of his time on downsampling his images and cropping them to a 100%. Even if your arguments are valid: what counts is that the eventual quality difference justifies a $ 1000 price difference, plus other perceived advantages for D800-buyers. By introducing the D800 – and next to it the the D600 – it looks as if Nikon has out-marketed Canon. No use trying to outscream those in favour of the D800. Instead, take your beloved 5DIII and start making beautiful pictures with it – and when showing them stop screaming that you have a better camera, but simply use them to prove that you’re a better photographer.

Chuck :
1)
I was also really surprised to see the DXOMark scores for the D800 & 5DIII.
They seem to contradict a few measurements made by DXOMark themselves.
After a quick check (http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/About/Sensor-scores/Use-Case-Scores), it seems that the definition of Low-Light ISO is :
“the highest ISO setting for a camera that allows it to achieve an SNR of 30dB while keeping a good dynamic range of 9 EVs and a color depth of 18bits.”

The 5DIII drops below 18 bits of color depth at ISO 2293, even though it retains a pretty good SNR & dynamic range.

The problem is that it’s mathematically impossible to define a fair and universal score that sums up many variables.
Since the 5DIII beats the D800 in at least one category (SNR for Screen), you could find another definition for Low-Light ISO with which the 5DIII would get a better score than the D800.

DXOMark scores are arbitrary and can lead to misleading conclusions.
To me, the overall score is useless but the individual measurements can be interesting.
The scores are especially meaningless when you compare different sensor sizes (like D90 vs 5D)

2)
DXOMark uses RAW information only. I must say I’m really impressed by the JPEG conversion of the 5DII & 5DIII. But this information isn’t used by DXO.
It’s also well-known that standard Nikon JPEG’s are kinda soft and flat compared to what you can extract from RAW. Dpreview states for almost every Nikon camera that you should apply a bit more sharpening to the JPEGs. Canon seems to apply more noise-reduction and sharpening by default.

Not only is the review done by paid shills, they’re now trying to censor the comments accusing them of being paid off by Canon. Sort of like how Fake Chuck is also paid by Canon isn’t it? Even Westfall is paid by Canon and we know he’ll say damn near anything!

DPreview just confirmed what DXO has saying all along by rating the D800 better than the 5DIII for low light High ISO shooting. You can’t convince the world otherwise Mr. Fucked Chuck Westfall. Even JPEG quality of Canon is rated worse than the D800.

Now you can go butt-fuck your self like the way Canon has butt-fucked every loyal Canon shooter by giving them a sensor from the dinosaur age in their latest $3500 product. Good luck with your rant, blaspheming about the D800!

Fake Chucky Boy. I like the picture with the peeing dog very much. Could you tell me please where you downloaded it. It has to be from a photo stock site as one can still see it is watermarked Loooooool. Bad boy, using watermarked pictures????????

Hi fake chuck. 5dmk3 seems like a pretty decent camera for the price, but I really want mine in a 1 series body. When’s canon going to release something I can replace my vintage 1dsmk3 with? I mostly shoot studio stuff, and rarely print smaller than 20×30″, so a 1dx with less resolution is not really an option. Whete’s the 1dxs??

Lol, the Nikon applies a completely different level of noise reduction, how can you compare them?

why do you compare JPEG at all xD are you stupid?

Just look at the RAW noise! If the RAW Noise is less, it have less noise.

On the left its the 5D Mark III, on the right its the D800 (downsized to the 5D Mark III size)

both at ISO 25´000

those are 100% RAW, what do you see? Yes! The D800 have less noise.

What did you compared in your useless test? The amount of noise reduction

what did you also compared

the amount of default sharpening and contrast

Canon have by default higher sharpening, contrast and noise reduction. That is something of taste and can be changed in-camera, also afterwards.

You compared the taste of the default settings

look at the raw, there is nothing about taste. You just see that the D800 have less noise, nothing you can talk about.

You suck balls, not DxO Mark

If you dont believe, just take the RAW of the 5D Mark III at ISO 25k and take the RAW of the D800 at ISO 25k –> downsize the D800 RAW to 22MP and what will yuo see? it have less noise then the 5D Mark III

Also the Nikon image is sharper in RAW as you can see.

So, applying sharpening, contrast and higher noise reduction doesnt make the 5D Mark III a better camera xDD the opposite. It shows that Canon need those tricks to have any chance against the D800.

And i say that not as a Nikon fanbay, i use a Sony Alpha 77 myself, get that!

Just by the way. That is also the reason why the Nikon D800 wins in low light (in addition to its much higher Dynamic Range and color depth).

DxO Mark compares the RAW Images at 8MP. so the 5DMk3 and also the D800 are compared at 8MP. In case of the 36MP, the D800 wins for sure, it can use those much Megapixels to compansate the Noise.

That is not unfair, that is a feature. You can choose between more details (36MP) or better Low-Light Performance (use less than 36MP, for example 20).

You mentioned dpreview as a good source, yes its a good source. Go to dpreview, download the RAW files and downsize the D800 images. Thats what i did. You´ll see

at 36MP the D800 looses (visible more noise)
at 22MP the D800 wins by far (visible less noise)

So whats your problem at all? Your a Canon fanboy and Canon wants more money for the worse camera? Is that the only problem you have? If so, than you should not write such a useless blog about it wasting others people time and maybe give new users a wrong picture.

They maybe think Canon is better and will pay more money for the worse camera. That is not fair! Not everyone have to do the same error than you!

Having less noise at the pixel level doesn’t mean anything if you’re comparing different resolution sensors. We don’t view and print pixels, we view and print images, and its the IQ of aggregated pixels that matters. A single 10oz cup holds less water than 3 4oz cups. If you’re thirsty the 3 4oz cups will quench your thirst more than the a single 10oz cup. It’s the total volume that matters (for IQ that’s quantum efficiency, D800=56%, 5DM3=48%), not the size of the individual cups (pixels).

Download the images from dpreview and look how d
Even dpreview said, i quote, “At higher ISOs, noise reduction is more aggressive by default than we would like, resulting in comparatively clean but disappointingly soft images, when viewed at 100%”preview proofs that you are wrong.

I think you still dont get it.

If you take the 36MP image from the D800 and then _R E S I Z E_ it to 22MP

Than, the images are at the identical size.

NOW (and only now) the D800 have _less_ noise than the 5DMk3

So if they are at the same resolution (22MP), Dpreview and DxO both proof that the D800 have less noise than the 5D Mark III

At 36MP the D800 have more noise, yes, but can not be compared to the 5D Mark III because it have much more megapixel.

To compare, both have to be at the same size (because megapixal can compensate noise when downscaling)

Listen man, even if you downsample images from the D800 and 5D3 to 1080p, the D800 still shows a lot more noise. That’s also why it fucking sucks for video. Check this video review: http://vimeo.com/41756540

Great summary: “The big open question was to what extent Canon had addressed the main image quality weakness of the 5D Mark II: limited dynamic range. Given the amazing resolution of digital cameras, when people say “I like the look of film” what they are really saying is that they like the way that film handles the range of highlight and shadow tones in real-world scenes, many of which have a larger range of tones than film or a sensor can record. The 5D Mark II was able to record a dynamic range of just 11.9 Evs (f-stops), according to DxO, which is one reason why the sensor rated a middling overall score of 79. For comparison, this is a step up from the original Canon 5D’s 11.1 Evs. The Sony NEX-7 mirrorless camera came through with 13.4 Evs. The Nikon D800 was able to record 14.4 Evs of dynamic range, i.e., 2.5 f-stops of additional range over the 5D Mark II, and that helped it earn an overall score of 95, the highest DxOMark ever at the time of the test. How did the Mark III fare in the DxO Labs test? A dynamic range of 11.7, actually a bit worse than the Mark II.

I haven’t done a full side-by-side test of dynamic range yet, but so far the anecdotal results are consistent with the DxO Labs test. I visited a friend who is a neuroscience professor specializing in the visual system and also an experienced Canon EOS system user and 5D Mark II owner. We took some pictures of his kids. He copied the JPEGs off the CF card and commented “that Mark III really sucks. Same lame dynamic range with highlights blown out and poor quality reds (look at the red flowers in a few of your shots)” (he wrote that email before DxO published its results, so he was not influenced by anything other than his own inspection of the images).”

The D800 sucks in the noise department. Image quality is fucking horrible man. Open your eyes. The only thing the D800 has going for it is the dynamic range BELOW ISO 800!!!!!
But the noise fucking ruins it unless you plan on shooting only at ISO 100.

But the noise fucking ruins it unless you plan on shooting only at ISO 100.

Real professionals need more than ISO 100.

The Canon 5D Mark III is even more unuseable because it have more noise at 22MP (as proofen on 20 points earlier).

If you talk about Video Quality, this is something completely different.

And the Video you sent is shit again. Its another “Bla bla let us talk again 10 minutes before you see anything because im such a professional guy and know everything”

Do you know why this video is shit?

1. This guy compares the Noise Reduction, not the Noise.
2. This Guy looks at the Videos at 400%

so why is this plain stupid

1. The Nikon have more noise, but also more details. As the noise is not visible at 100%, this is something Nikon decided “Quality over Marketing”
2. Canon applies more Noise Reduction to have smoother videos (but they also have less details)
3. Who the hell loooks Videos at 400%. Really thats the most stupid thing i every seen in my life.

So why is Nikon Still better (also at Videos)?

If you look Videos at 100% (like 99,9% of all people do) you have more details (but more noise, but this noise is not visible when you look at 100%)

So again

comparing noise reduction is as stupid

So whats next? Its just an awesome feeling to destroy one myth after an other. Common! Gimme more!

Does all this really matter?
U hate Nikon, then so be it, just b happy with what u have.
Swearing for every 2nd word isn’t going to do much to anyone but mess with ur own head.
It has come to a time where any dslr is good enough.

FC doesn’t hate Nikon… Nor does he have great love for Canon. Read some of his preceding articles. He’s trying to keep people honest with themselves. All he wants is a camera that “real world pros can use”. It’s what many people (me included) asked for. If you want to shoot a wedding, event, or sports right now Canon is the best tool for the job. If you want to shoot in a studio or landscape at ISO 100 all the time, go with a Nikon. Anyone that says any differently is not being serious with themselves whilst relying on graphs and specs to form an unintelligible argument instead of simply relying upon our eyes and abilities. Since when are specs and graphs what make a picture good or our job easier?

No you are going nuts and obviously not truly conversant with the technology. Have used both cameras and it is horses for courses. I think the Canon does have the edge on videos but having said that American TV series producers are now buying the D800 in favour of the CANON. Mind you – what do they know? wonder if this vehem would be flying if the DXO tests favoured the Canon. They would probably be the best and most accurate testers in the world.

Really! you’re so desperate?
You’re showing screen SNR comparison and ignoring print one in DXOMARK, ignoring the cleaner shadows in D800 shots even at base ISO, ignoring the higher sharpening and stronger NR in Canon high ISO JPEGS noted by Dpreview. I’m sorry to tell you that D800 will go on crashing 5D Mrk3 sales, and that your blood pressure will get even higher if you don’t stop this useless moaning. You’re happy with 5D? Use and impress us with your photos.

Stop telling bullshit. D800 won’t crash 5D Mk 3 or 5D Mark 3 (learn how to spell it correctly!!!!) sales. Although there is ebay, craigslist … the hurden is too big to jump ship to Nikon for most of us. Moreover it is useless as in some areas 5D Mk 3 is even better that the D800 and both are good cameras. So for the fuck’s sake stop with these silly comments and go our shooting (pictures not yo……)

its funny to see a comment made by someone explaining useful and sensible information on these comparison and then stupid chuck just goes “look at the samples, use your eyes!” hilarious really… running out of reasons to prove your theory?

thats because you’re comparing full res samples you fucking idiot, of course there would be more visible noise, 36mp vs 22mp wtf man! it doesnt take rocket science to know that. kindly use what’s left of your brain and do a sensible comparison. i feel for you man, really…

then apparently you may have a fake sample, DPREVIEW has already mentioned that the noise performance is almost equal with the 5D and even better when downsampled. Actually almost all the reviews have confirmed that and yours the only different I saw. Now go and cry over to your momma that no one is believing your theory

Tell us FC, are you the one behind the gifts from Canon to DPR to get them to fake their ratings? C’mon, a camera that’s $500 bucks more and doesn’t even show on the DXO ratings gets the same rating as the D800 and D800E? My favourite magazine article now are the ones that are titled, “Canon 5DMKIII, worth the upgrade?” LOLROTF. 😉

Too bad that the fucking 1DX semms to be further delayed Fake Chucky. So did they lost the construction plans or do they badly need to improve the (under those circumstances) “shitty” 1DX (hardware improvnets as new sensor, softwae improvements regarding DR etc) to be on a level with NIKON D4 again????????????????????

I really enjoyed this review. DXOMark have lost alot of respect with the half arse testing. Not only the sheer ingnorance on just the sensor test but the whole camera including software and Digic5+ . DXOMark work for nikon so the score is no surprise. I picked up a work mates 5DIII and it is a killer camera. D800 is nice for big prints of LOL cats. Looking forward to more of your reviews chuck.

Honorable Sir Fake Chuck. You should see the positive side: at least in this very hot moment there is love in the air and no more hate or war (Canon vs. Nikon). This is when Canon and Nikon unite (literally spoken, you know what I mean). By the way I need you advice. What camera do you think would be best to take a picture of NikonGirl: D800 or 5dMkIII? If I knew how old she is then I could decide for the “show me all wrinkles D800” or the “beautiful valley and mountains D800” or the more softer and pleasing 5DMkIII. Probably you know how old “she” is? 😉

They only have lost respect with you. Possibly if they had agreed with your technical Objective assessment they would not have lost your respect. I am sure the rest of the camera world will now ignore DXO because YOU have lost respect for them. Hmm interesting

What is with DXOMark and photographers deciding on this rubbish website as a self help guide when purchasing. As Borat say’s “its like letting a monkey fly a plane” and further more it is like using an outside toilet and flushing without the pipe connected and the shit runs downhill especially with the other half arsed websites using this to compare camera’s. DXOMark really missed the mark on testing this camera… But then again too many morons carry on about megapixels as the bee’s knee’s when its also about the glass and everything else that is designed in the camera.

And now I’m a proud owner of the 5D Mark III with 24-105mm and since leaving nikon will not be shooting anymore lol cats for large prints.

O.k., FC, let me summarize your findings:
a) The D800 has an advantage in DR and shadow noise, but only up to 800 ISO, and thus, because it’s the better camera only in 97% of all cases, it’s worse.
b) 36mp is for morans. Like they said on those dpreview threads back in ’02, no lens in the world is able to resolve more than 6mp anyway, and besides, you have to compare on pixel level. Look, morans: it’s just like it was in the days of film, when you compared the contact sheets from a Minox and those from an 8x10inch Sinar, you’d find those were cameras that produced equally sharp photos. And who in the world would ever care what a photo would look like in, let’s say, full page size, except – you guessed it – morans?
c) DXO is for morans, and the only camera reviewer on the net who is not a moran is one Dennis Bodzash (http://www.examiner.com/article/canon-5d-mark-iii-kills-nikon-d800-d4-at-high-iso-proof-the-pictures).
d) DR in general is for morans who haven’t learnt how to expose properly.
e) Price difference – what price difference, you fucking stupid morans?

hey, i have an idea, if we cram D800 into a 1d body, call it 1DsM4 and slap a 8000$ pricetag it wont be for morans anymore, woohoo!

on a serious note, FC we liked you when you were slamming Canon for a lot less, and now with all this overpriced 2007 tech you just keep trolling with the Nikon crowd, get over it and start acting like Fake Chuck again, otherwise just rename the site http://5yoChuckWestfall.wordpress.com

The Canon images can be dramatically improved in post.
The Canon fps and buffer times appear to be superior.
Despite the same rating on dpreview, the Canon appears to be better in low light/high ISO situations.
Aliasing and moiré issues are almost non-existent on the Canon, but can be an issue (especially in video from what I’ve seen) with the D800 and especially with the D800E. Philip Bloom says to never use the D800E for video.

However, with enough time and/or light, the image quality and detail on the D800 is spectacular and unsurpassed in the DSLR world. If you only shoot in the studio and/or landscapes you would want the D800.

You could rub dog crap all over this guy’s Canon lenses and he would like the images better out of the Canon. To summarize his review: “Look, here are three examples of the Canon taking better photos. I know I cherry picked these images and ignored instances where the Nikon performed better. It doesn’t matter. It doesn’t matter what the facts are. It doesn’t matter what others say. Canon is better. Period.”

“If you only shoot in the studio and/or landscapes you would want the D800.”

Yeah, see, that’s the problem. Most photographers today do more than just that with their cameras. So if you want to spend all that cash to be limited, by all means go ahead. The 5D3 images in RAW are pretty sharp and can be sharpened even more. JPEG images are sharper out of the camera. the D800 has a marginal advantage for details in RAW at LOW ISO. For video you simply cannot go with the D800 because of the fucking huge amounts of noise and the moire and aliasing. The 5D3 video sharpens up very good in post.
The AF system on the 5D3 is many times better than the D800 as well. Overall the 5D3 is the better camera and that’s just a fact.

As I said on another post, if DXO wants to do a FAIR test on any sensor, they should f**king use the SAME optics, SAME shutter, SAME aperture assembly, SAME wave length of light, and SAME all other things to rule out any other factors. From cnet review I see they use canon lens to test canon body, I’d like to think they use nikon lens to test nikon body, etc. That makes the result less legitimate. If anyone wants to talking about this, learn and do some homework first please.
The other way I see is the Full Sensor Apparent Image Quality (FSAIQ) is not the actual image quality, sharpness and contrast plays important roll here, which related to both sensor and lens. So again DXO does not tell the sensor itself, it does tell the appearance in a specific case (8MP).
Somewhere at clarkvision website says the optimal size of a pixel is 5um and the density of a FF is around 34MP as D800. However, you just can not stupidly say D800 is better or worse than 5D3 based on the f**king marks.
I doubt if nikon has any paid freelancer to watch and post on the net, I see the trend everywhere.

DXO confirms every single test that is done with precision. Those who understand imaging can verify the results.

One interesting fact that DXOMARK confirms is that from an imaging quality point of view a low end Nikon such as a D3100 is 2 stops inferior compared to the D4. So, if you shoot static subjects with good light, the D3100 will do because its low ISO is clean enough. Funny, isn’t it? It shows there is more to a camera than image quality. Even if the image quality was identical, many would get the more expensive model, because it would get better images in the real world, it would capture the right monent easier and with better focus. More money shots for professional protographers and less wasted time. All this image quality focus in very misleading to camera buyers, image quality is beyond good enough on SLRs. In the films days people paid more to buy the better cameras despite the fast that they could all use the same film and get identical image quality.

What you mean is that they do not agree with you. I imagine that the sales of Nikon will now suffer. You really do need to look at the results and the comments made here more dispassionately. The DXO report covers the sensor only. It does not look at post processing. That is the function of the camera. Almost certainly the same sensor will appear in Sony cameras in the near future. It should receive the same rating. Will you be as damming about the SONY camera?

..FC’s excessive use of expletives certainly degrades his credibility..nontheless the ‘Nikoneista’ do seem to be cult-like in their devotion to the brand and lets face it there’s going to be biased reviews for both camps if you search it thoroughly..yes seeing is believing..unfortunately it’s hard to be objective with the intrinsic variables inherent in the screen resolution (even the angle of your laptop screen) when making these image quality ‘judgements’..bottomline more megapixels means more noise ‘management’ issues which offsets gains in resolution..Canon and Nikon have taken different paths here..each has it’s pros and cons..if Canon releases a new 36+mp MklV in the future then Nikon may be on to something..until such time it’s the quality and range of the available glass that defines the superiority of the system and that’s where I give Canon the edge..

All this crazy back-and-forth just emphasizes the continued technological shortcomings of digital cameras and the unjustified cost. Sure, if you’re a professional photographer and you have a specific and unavoidable business need to work digital, then you have no choice (and you can write off the cost as a business expense). But if you’re just into making great photographs for the pure enjoyment of it, no need to be a tech-weenie about it and argue over moire, aliasing, MP, etc. Just stick with FILM! On the whole, my experience is 35mm film still beats digital – 5dIII and D800 included. In fact, for about $1,500 a used Hasselblad system will blow the doors off anything digital under $40,000. So smoke a joint and relax — it’ll improve your photography.

1) For photos that will be processed raw and viewed on monitor or printed, the dxomark noise and dynamic range scores are precise because downsampling is involved. Nikon is better. It’s also better as a camera, the focus is a lot better, in the real world it will get sharper images.

2) The methods of producing video are different in the two cameras, Nikon appear to be skipping pixels and Canon appear to skip but also also mix, probably because they can read and process faster. Canon get less alias and better noise performance because of this. The blue noise calibraton is better on the Canon, it’s optimised, the Nikon is a direct implementation that does not try to improve every iso setting.

3) High ISO is important because the sensors are quite large. On 2/3″ sensors one can use faster lenses such as f1.4, on SLR they are either not available at the required focal lenghts or DOF becomes too shallow to be practical. Especially when talking about very cheap SLR cameras that will not come with 50,000 euro of lenses or a multimember crew with lots of lighting support. So, expect to need at least 4x higher iso vs 2/3″ if not 8x. ISO3200 is actually a requirement for some situations, while ISO800 will do it on 2/3″ and even lower iso is fine for film shooting situations that are professionally lit. I wouldn’t want a low cost SLR that is not usable at ISO3200.

Sorry man but the D800 shows more noise in RAW and JPEG at the pixel level even when downsampled to 22MP. The 5D Mark 3 is way better and DXOMark is misleading everyone. You can clearly see more noise in D800 images in the images above. For video the D800 is fucking worthless. The focus system of the 5D3 is far superior with tons more crosstype focus points. The video reviews above, such as the one from The Camera Store, clearly shows this.

..let’s digress a bit Chuck and use the success of Nascar as a model that illustrates the ‘dumbdown’ of America..for instance the so-called Impala that GM races bares no technical resemblence to the product on the showroom floor (they race rwd recently fuel-injected powertrains that are basically push-rod V8s developed in the fiftes) yet the average ‘fan’ does not know or care about this and rabidly supports the brand that is winning..Nikon ‘morons’ are not that different in that they are blind to the visual evidence that supports your argument.. you can’t win here buddy..they’ve bought-in to an illusion of superiority and DXO simply exists to feed that illusion so keep up the good work ’cause some of us do ‘feel your pain’..

i used both cameras for a few weeks , and Nikon’s D800 performs impressivly under controlled situasjons (glue the bugs to a plate etc.etc). and if i where using a camera on a 3pod continusly id go for the D800 .however…do not forget to use a radio remote so yo can stay in a safe place. , i,m mostly working out in the field, the MK3’s, autofocus system just deliver so manny keepers compared to the D800, and i did test the ISO performance on both cameras and the D800 gives werry nice pictures when on a tripod , up to iso800, D800 Deliver werry nice pictures. from iso 800 and up to 3200 the mk3 have np keeping up in this range btw. (this is also where i mostly use my camera). unnless the D800 is mounted on a tripod.. nither the image quality or ISO outperforms the MK3, from years of exsperience i know when you more mp= the more you need a tripod. and if you test the cameras using tripods. the D800 actualy do look bether in some situasjons but a cam that req a tripod to deliver bether images than the mk3 is not much use for me, , nothing on this planet would make me use the D800 in te field,,its a studio Camera .. period . . it dont handle shakes well ither.. simlpy due to the high mp, there is a reason wy the most exspensive dslr’s have less than 24 mp.s the know that motionblur whil destroy the images faster than a dogfart in a crowded elevator. we did do a atofocus and shake test (mostly for fun)
a friend did take the mk3 and i used the D800 we did drive one sligtly bumpy road and was trying to get as manny keepers as possible, we used several moving and stationary targets, and no mather how manny times and settings we did try no mather when we swaped cameras , the D800 did deliver almost 226 totaly blurry usless shoots . 4 was sligtly useable. the canon managed to take 341 pictures 130 sh was pritty nice . 40sh was like the D800’S 4 .. sligtly usable.

that was my exsperience whit them and i realy dont care how people react to what i say . i just think that the mk3 is an awsome Alround camera ,and thats exsacly what i want when i pay this much for one.

VERDICT: on a pod AND in controlled situasjons. Winner is Nikon D800 . uncontrollable situasjons NOT on any steady surfaces winner is most defenetly : The Canon mk3

i know my english sucks sligtly more than an awreage swede, but that i got to live whit myself 🙂

I own a Nikon D7000 which I have been moderately happy with and since I have Nikon glass I have considered upgrading to the D800, but I am wondering now after reading this if I would be disappointed with the results? I never use a tripod, all my shooting is done freehand and frequently at ISO’s above 400. I am considerably new at this.

its totaly up to you what you want/need try rent/borrow both, den deside. i would newer buy a exspensive pice of eqipment whitout trying it atleast a few hours/days . i,m continusly running tru the woods/ around rivers , somtimes running around in some city at night . whit the MK3 i Love the C1-C3 programable buttons , i can get a shot or so fast no mather what popps up. and the autofocus system from the 5D3 just delivers , on the Canon side the 5D2 i autofocus just sucked balls .i was a big fan of Nikon Focus systems . and what i got whit the 5D3 its hard to be unnhappy . i can recomend the D700/D800 also both are great and delivers . the trick is to fint the camera that have shortcommings and features that fits your needs , i was using A D700 and a 7D and a 5D2 for a long time, the D700 was a alrounder whit the exstra grip so i got more shoots off, the 5D2 was an exselent studio camera (stil is) the 7D is crap on any iso 400+ . i stil used it for Birding the crop sencor gave my a werry nice zoom and 7p a sec always gave me a few keepers . now i trade them al in for the 5D3 it give me almost al those things i needs in one house, iven the HDR that i was shure was junk when i got the camera is working great , , (always use a tripod whit HDR). and the silent mode just rawks, when you also dont want the shutter to blure your long range images and cant use delay or dont have a remote nearby , it just saves the day , silent mode is realy soft and silent. i dont have more than a few weeks exsperience whit the D800 so someone else that have one and uses it probl whil tell you of whats the best things whit that modell a thingy thats actualy werry importent ,, when you hold it does it feel right ? ,, seems silly but its not when you like how it feels you whil use it more and your more eager to learn to use it bether ,

and if you read al this whit my crapy English ,, and understood it. you whil have np learning to use any of the cameras i talk about 🙂 btw , the 7D is not known for beeing a great camera but stil i know around 12-15 Prof bird photogreafers, and atleast 10 of them uses the 7D Just because of the speed /autofocus (over the 5D2) and the exstra Zoom. so… its weard somtimes what people ends up using, it just tells us that a camera thats awsome in tests or great for some people dont nesseserily fits for you , incl the 5D3 so,, trying before buying is ewrything,

Mr Fake, I own a Nikon D800. I use a tripod whenever possible which is how you get the highest image quality from any camera for goodness sakes. For stills I have mostly used Nikon and for motion I use Alexa. Somehow I have paid for cars and put my kids through college. I am primarily cinematographer and the last thing I ever want to do is use a HDSLR for shooting a professional motion job unless it is the only camera that will suffice. They are extremely limited and you have to compromise to work within their limitations. This is a sickening review mostly because of the poor use of language. When I see language used this way I can’t take the writer seriously. I would never work/hire a person who behaved like you or spoke like you. Grow up. Pro photographers don’t get emotional about hating cameras, they use the right camera for the job. Getting the right camera is a lot easier than getting the great job after all. A pro learns about all the cameras and which ones will benefit in particular situations. Remember, what you write on the internet will follow you forever. Future employers may Google your name and find this piece of work and make a judgement about you.

Man I couldn’t care less about future employers. Who’re going to hire me? Nikon? Sony? No thanks, I’m good where I am right now here at Canon. Things are going great right now and 2012 is the year of EOS!!!!! It fucking pains me to see those cocksmokers at DxOLabs piss on everything with their fucking worthless sensor database. Anyone with good eyesight can clearly see their piece of shit data doesn’t agree with reality. But hey, who am I right? If you want to spend your money on crap, be my guest.

Chuck, please, PLEASE get some help. Seriously man, you are losing it. If you don’t want to do it for Canon, then do it for your family. You are completely fucking delusional, obviously. You NEED professional help in dealing with this downward spiral of Canon. (Not the Swami – PROFESSIONAL help.) In time you too will learn to accept the facts, and to face the facts, and you WILL get better. But I am very worried about you, Chuck. I am seeing the warning signs! http://www.helpguide.org/mental/suicide_prevention.htm
Seriously.

Anyone with decent eyesight knows Canon files are over processed, muzzy, with crap colours. Look at the 1DX crap on CPN, hardly ringing PR endorsements either. Never mind look the motion blue too. You and Canon have lost it with real shooters, go play with your C300 in Hollywood and stay away, Nikon have got your furious customers covered. (not that you cared since the 1D3 shit hit the fan)

Obviously you do not have good eyesight. – Just realised that this whole thing is a wind up. Fake Chuck is,as he says, FAKE and just here to make outrageous unsubstantiated comments to upset Nikon owners. Well done for catching us all out. We fell for it hook line and sinker. It is just a joke.

Steve..the fact that you (a professional cinematographer) are responding to this post validates the premise that this new generation of HDSLRs are capable of producing footage that (under ideal circumstances using L-quality glass) can produce footage that approaches the quality of dedicated HD ‘ pro-cams’ like the Alexa (I’m sure you’re aware of the episode of House that was shot with a 5D)..FC gets this but also emphasises that these are professional still cameras that have the added ability to shoot decent video..what’s going on here is a dissection of the corrupt ‘politics’ that skews the hard data in order to lure potential customers..you might not like his ‘style’ (think Hunter S meets Howard Stern) but once you get past the excessive use of the f-bomb he’s pretty entertaining and exposes some valid anomalies in the way these cameras are promoted to the public so don’t hire him but if you want to be amused and educated at the same time you may want to subscribe to this post..

Proginator.
if my english was bether thats exsacly what i would say myself , and its wy i subscribe/follow FC to learn.. or get a good laf (mostly Lafing ) ither way it always make my day look a little bether 🙂

if megapixels was ewrything.. well itl be fun if DXO labs did test the new Nokia 41 megapixel phone that whil outperform most SLR cameras (according to Nokia) you bether trow away your D800, since its now outperformed by superior teknology, ooo holy MEGAPIXELS i bow in envy!!!
i whil newer again eat a cookie whit less than a 40 Megapixel sencor firmly glued to it!!

il no sell al my Canon Nikon, Pentax eqipment , just so i can be a Megapixel Proffesional!!

The Nokia 808 is going to make Nikon and Canon emploees comit sepuku/harikiri/ al ower Japan!!!

This is probably the most moronic review I have ever seen
Although on reflection I think it’s done for comedy even though it’s not that funny
I think this guy/moron is trying to copy Ken Rockwell but with more expletives and saying the opposite of what is true to try and upset people, really sad

Ah, some assumptions about me without knowing anything about me, sums up your review nicely….
So let’s say I have a choice of believing someone who can’t string two words together, displays Tourette’s syndrome, has dodgy tests and an agenda. Or a well respected company (dxomark) with rigorous industry leading techniques, no bias and kicks out amazing software that demonstrates they understand intimately the RAW sensor map of every leading camera company…..
That’s a hard one!

..I’ve been subscribed to this post for months and I haven’t read one remotely intelligent response from any ‘pro-nikon’ owner/user yet..yes FC doesn’t hold back his contempt for the apparently fraudulent manner in which the D800 is compared to the mk3 but the visual evidence is there for anyone who can see their computer screen clearly.. you may not like his style but if there is a professional photograher out there who has used both cameras and can intelligently articulate why the D800 isn’t an ‘over-pixelled dropped ball’ by Nikon please feel free to re-educate me..

A Mamiya with a P35 costs as much as 2 bodies and can’t see in the dark, but I’ll be damned if it’s not a better camera when you need to make something look incredible. FC, Where’s the guy who wanted his pro assed camera to do pro assed shit? Where’s the guy who went apeshit because, even though his camera wasn’t a shit ass Nikony, It still wasn’t as good as it NEEDS to be?

Get that tiny cock out of your mouth and get back to fighting… Or give FCW to someone who will.

i found this t day .. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=brtPi9oVJ4Y&feature=related
and it does say in the Nikon D800 MANUAL ,,it says crystal clear that it needs live wiev. a tripod… to get the image quality according to the reported megapixels. something i stated a while back while testing it 🙂

The examples and comments that you have provided ” the so called proof ” are completely out of context.

20 % of all deadly accidents are caused by drunk drivers, and so you will state that it is safer to drive drunk as 80% of the accidents are caused by sober drivers.

That is the kind of reasoning you are presenting here, fact is that the D800 is just outstanding.
That doesn’t mean that the Canon is no good. It is just another purpose camera. That is how simple it is.

drunkdrivers dont follow patterns (same as Noise) they can be spoted by the Police and they are random, sober people however are always following a pattern. and if you ‘downsample’ that picture whit todays bicubic or what ewer computer algoritm. the Random aka drunk drivers whil be taken out first .

and i agree the D800 and the D53 are great cameras eatch for theyr area and type of fhoto 🙂 apples and bananas 🙂

Seriously you are mental, sad and pathetic. While the rest of the world is outside creating inspired work, you’re spewing hatred. What do I think is better? Neither! What’s better is entirely dependent on the final user. It saddens me to think of the hours and days you’ve wasted creating this blog when you could have grown your work and developed your talent. It’s not the equipment that makes the shot, it’s the person holding it.

If I’ve learned anything in my years of working in this industry, talking to thousands of photographers of different skill levels, it’s that ego and obsession with gear holds back many a photographer from becoming more than they are capable of. Humility and a true appreciation for having a refined artistic approach is what make a master photographer.

To sum up, get off the computer, put down the ruler, stop measuring your penis. Go outside its a beautiful day, the sun is warm.

I am a Nikon user and love Nikon. Having said that I am not sure the D800 is the camera everyone thinks it is. I have been shooting with a D300 for 3 years and everyone said the D700
blows the D300 away. I got one and compared the difference. I was shocked. First of all
my 70-200 became a 70-200. On my D300 it was like shooting with a 100-300. My images
looked sharper on my D300 due to the fact the my images were in the sweet spot of my lens.
Also how many people really need to shoot 3200 ISO. I usually put my D300 on a tripod
when shooting in a church. My image quality was just as clean as the D700 without distortion because again I was using the sweet spot of the lens. Canon was smart staying with 22megapixels. Nikon & Canon should come out with a 24 megapixel and leave any higher
megapixel count to the medium format guys. I had the Nikon D7000 and no matter what I did
with my shutter speed I still got a soft blur on every image. I used my friends D800 what a
lemon! Nikon’s first lemon. This is a studio camera. People are thinking that the D800 is a replacement for the D700. Not at all. 4 frames per second from 7 on the D700. Soft images
and high noise after 1600 ISO. I can’t find any wedding images showing how great this camera
is without processing being done. The sensor is not large enough for 36 megapixel.
If your shooting a wedding these days you need speed and sharp images not show soft
out of focus images. You were hired to capture the the wedding. I don’t think the bride
is going to go though these image and most printers cut your image quality.
The D800 is great for close cropping. Just shoot with this in mind. I you want a close up
shot shoot close up. I enlarged a 24×36 print from Walmart from a D300 the print was
stunning. I am not sure why we need all the megapixels when most advertising is going
with digital displays. Why not come out with a 3 chip CMOS 24 megapixel. The color
would be great! Better flesh tones.

Total agree with everything you say here about the D7000 (soft) and the D800 (lots of issues). Have to disagree with your comments on the D300 – D700 comparison. The D700 is a much better camera for low light. The D700 seems to pull in much more light than the D300 and in turn can give an amazing image from a dark scene. The contrast and sharpness is also a bit better on the D700. Away from this they are very simular cameras (have owned both the D300s and D700).

I upgraded to the 5D3 from 5D because of my investment in Canon glass.

Things I like about my 5D3
– FPS
– Silent shutter (This is amazing). The shutter on the D800 is very loud and it’s silent mode is a joke.
– High ISO performance
– Rear LCD
– C1, C2, C3 modes

Things I liked about the D800 (Rented it for a week)
– 36MP Sensor
– Cost ($500 cheaper)
– Dynamic Range
– AF linked spot metering (Canon has this on 1DX). what is the point of letting us choose the AF point but not meter there???
– D800 shares the same metering as that on the more expensive D4.They both have the same Expeed 3 engine (Canon 1Dx has dual Digic 5+ and a Digic 4. 5D3 has only one Digic 5+ engine)
– UDMA supported SD Card (Canon crippled this on the 5D3)
– Crop for DX lenses and 5:4 images
– Alloy lens housing vs plastic on Canon
– Built in flash and remote triggering
– AF assist light
– Face detect

The DPReview Raw image comparison is a bit misleading as you can click on different parts of the image and get different results for noise. It may be much better to look at the whole RAW image subjectively here. If you do at ISO3200 the results are surprising; the D700 wins followed by a D800 and 5D Mark 3 tie then the D800E.

This is all BS anyway the big question is which camera takes the best subjective pictures regardless of MPixels, dynamic range, noise, usability etc, the pictures are the most important thing. From all the photos on Flickr I have looked at the Nikon D700, followed closely by the 5D Mark 3, take the best subjective images. In fact if you don’t need to print large photos you are much better off with the D700. The D800 has issues with intermittent low contrast and green yellow tint using flash lighting and the images don’t seem to have the lifelike look of the D700.

I have the D700 and have trailed both the 5D Mark 3 and the D800 recently and can see no reason to sell my D700! Also hate to say it but the 5D Mark 3 is the new D700.

I was perusing the 5D3 forums on dpreview (God you wouldn’t believe the frigging uproar the D600 has created…those fellow Canon users really need to smoke one and relax) when someone linked to something that linked to here. Laughed so hard I think I might have wet myself. I realize a lot of people think expletives of this sort are unprofessional and come from small minds but in my opinion, sometimes it’s language like that is what’s need to finally get the frigging point across (cause too many people just won’t plain listen to reason till you shock them) that there’s too much bullshit in the world and one of the sources of bullshit is DXOmark. By the way, for anyone out there that thinks they know what the frig they are doing, try converting your raws using their software. Frigging horrible. Their “automatic…we know your sensor” bullshit software creates such odd artifacts when processing a raw file I pity the person who thinks they’re working with a winner. Anyway, so go ahead and believe them when they rate the Nikon over the Canon. UNLESS…they are factoring in something they don’t want to fess up about. God sakes people, just TELL US what the hell you are doing so that maybe we can understand your stupid frigging results! It’s absolutely no wonder why for every person who quotes DXO like the bible, you’ve got two who think they’re full of dog shit. Their numbers and results don’t make sense and they aren’t willing to tell anyone how or why they reach the knob conclusions they do. Personally, I look at their stuff and if it happens to agree with my experience of shooting x number of pics in x number of varying situations over a period of years, that my be interesting. If not…don’t give a crap. Oh, and will I check out DXO before buying my next camera? Guess. And FC, nice try but you know, even trying to hit some people in the head with the truth isn’t enough. But hell, some people like living in ignorance…like it’s some sort of fuzzy warm blanket I guess.

You know what’s funny? I actually saw some test shots of some clown who was bragging about how he could pull the shadows of his D800 up 4 stops and see a good pic appear from out of nowhere. Yes, you read that right…FOUR FRIGGIN stops. What a dink. So that’s who buys these pieces of junk, people who want to expose their images improperly so that they can push and pull them until they get a correct exposure. Sorry if the Canon people just shoot it right and don’t need to recover FOUR FRIGGIN stops from the shadows. It still looked like dog poo anyway with no colour or detail but he thinks it means the camera rocks. No, it just makes lazy frigging “photographers”. And perhaps some people haven’t noticed that only a handful of people in the world give a crap about what DXO says. I doubt you’d be thumping your chests if Canon or Pentax was “on top”. You’d be screaming about how it’s not possible. The moral of the story is not who is on top, it’s that DXO is a steaming pile of dog poo that shouldn’t be paid attention to. And to some who think comparing pics at iso 3200 or, gasp, 6400 is silly….apparently you’ve just shot snapshots of your vacationing siblings with your cameras on a sunny beach. Ever shot a wedding in a church darker than a cave after the minister has explicitly told you even bouncing a flash is prohibited? Apparently not. And please, don’t start with the “use fast primes” crap. That’ll only get you so far until you need to start cranking the iso and even those primes seem dark. Then it’s on the the reception but hey, enjoy taking your sunshine pics at iso 100 and leave the high iso work and demands to those who need it. Personally, I’m thrilled the days of iso 50 film are long gone and I have the ability to take shots I couldn’t conceive of before. Sorry if the truth hurts but the future is that high iso is in demand and has a real use to a lot of people. The cameras that can deliver sell.

Yeah, the forums are full of people proclaiming the miraculous performance of this camera when no one has actually tested it yet and shown us what it can do. It’s no different than the idiots decrying the 6D when all we’ve really seen are pictures of the camera itself. Come back in a few months and compare properly processed raws and who knows, maybe the Nikon will look pretty good with it’s max of 6400. Apparently you’ve only looked at online tests, follow DXO (knobs) and believe all the crap on forums full of people who pretend to be experts and probably don’t even own a frigging P&S. Have you not looked at the mk3 vs 800 raw samples above? Yup, the new cheap nikon will outperform it, right? Nikon is about to piss off all the people who shelled out for the 800 but making the output of the 600 better. Funny man. And when it comes to comparing cameras……DON’T COMPARE JPEGS. Everyone with two functioning brain cells knows Canon crippled the jpeg output of the mk3 to appeal to common folk. Pretty stupid considering it’s a camera aimed at pros. Knobs! I’ll give you this, it’ll probably focus better than the 6D. What the frig was Canon thinking putting in only onecross focus point? Knobs!

Well, I’ve seen it, I’ve tested it, ‘cos I own one. And it is very, very good. The shots out of the D600 ARE VERY MUCH BETTER than the steaming turds that the 5D2 makes. Haven’t seen to many 5D3 images yet, maybe ‘cos all the 5D3’s are still sitting on the store shelf, as everyone has been buying D800’s. Oh well….. All you poor, long suffering Canon fanboys scream bias whenever Nikon/Sony sensor cameras smash you Cannots into irrelevence on the scientifically calculated DXO mark charts. Or perhaps they are, because in the lens ratings, the Nikon lenses are higher rated than equivalent cannon rubbish as well..

And who THE FUCK shoots above 6400iso, and expects good images, regularly? You morons! You call yourselves photographers??? Our Cannon crop sensor couldn’t shoot over 400iso and get decent quality. Dumbasses.

You’re seriously asking the opinion of people who casually cruise the internet as to whether or not you should spend $thousands? And of course, you get knobs like this who tell you to sell all your great lenses (I’m assuming you have if you’re shooting 5d2) and have to go buy Nikon junk to throw in front of your sensor that shoots native 6400 max. Oh, I forgot…DXO loves this sensor and Nikon so you should totally believe what they say and everyone should sell all their Canon gear and buy Nikon. Laugh, I thought I’d die. Instead, you might want to go to a reputable website that tests cameras and has no bias and oh yes, knows what the hell they are talking about. Try looking at the very least at some site like dpreview and taking a good look at their test results instead of asking some anonymous schmuck what they think you ought to do. Hell, there’s even a forum at that site where you can get the opinion of anonymous schmucks too but better yet, they have a lot of regulars who own and use the cameras and can give you real opinions other than “sell your Canon crap and buy Nikon cause DXO thinks it’s the cat’s meow in complete denial of all presented evidence of the photos above”. Just be aware, you may not find much help on that forum cause there’s nothing worse that someone asking you to make up their mind for them. Look at the impartial reviews and judge for yourself. Avoid DXO like the plague as it doesn’t help you. Look at sites like dpreview that takes controlled shots and lets you judge for yourself if you think they look good, tells you how the camera performs so you can judge if it suits your needs and so on and so forth. Hell, I personally don’t care if someone out there buys a friggin Kodak P&S and calls themself a wedding photographer. I’m just saying, “What the hell are you asking people here for”? But if you want to know, the mk3 is worth the upgrade. DON’T TAKE MY WORD FOR IT AND DO SOME FRIGGIN RESEARCH!!! Or buy a Nikon.

I still want to know who are the photographers who shoot over iso 6400 and expect good images! And I’m talking to you Bob McD! Who gives a flying fark if the D600 doesn’t go over iso 6400? Seriously? Fark… if the light is that bad, use flash, morons. Fucking Canon fanboys! I’d rather have superior dynamic range & color depth than some unused ability to shoot at over 6400 iso.

Just what is going through Canon’s mind to have this still sitting on the shelves beside the MKIII? They should be embarrassed at this point to be trying to pawn it off on people. It’s tragic to see all the forums with people wondering if they should buy a mkII or III. If you can’t afford the II, save your pennies. Don’t throw them away. Now if you already made the move Canon wanted you to make and bought one, get rid of it. Now. As a Canon fan, I hate razzing on Canon but I’ll dish it out to them when they screw up just as much as the next guy. MkII…waste of metal and plastic.

..check out this slick video shot with the D600..beautifully shot but quality-wise it looks like it would look noticeably better if shot with a 60D (sporting L-glass) for half the cost of the fully decked out Nikon package they must have used..

..pretty much..the D600 seems to do quite well in brightly lit situations but the quality falls off dramtically when the light drops..here’s where the smaller APS-C sensor shines in the entry-level Canons..blacks are not as ‘washed out’ and shadow detail is more evident yet overall resolution still remains on par with the full- frame advantage of the the D600 ..

I was in a camera shop the other day to look at camera bags, and happened to walk by the Canon DSLR counter. I overheard the sales clerk actually tell a customer that the 5D Mk III would produce sharper images than the D800!

It’s kind of ridiculous what depths Canon owners will stoop to. It’s like listening to Republicans.

..looks like FC is too preoccupied to respond at this time (probably busy ‘entertaining’ the hordes of Canon groupies he hangs with) so in the guise of FFC I’ll do my best here: Check out the visual evidence you fucking MORON!..any idiot with half a brain and decent vision can see that the images posted in Dickso’s review clearly show the MK3 to be superior in noise and resolution at anything over 100 iso!..then they have the fucking gall to post numbers that they say validates their findings!..What is this, The Emporer’s New Fucking Clothes? WTF?..they’re obviously a front backed by Nikon/Sony to sell over-rated product to the hordes of braindead Nikon monkeys who are blind to the possibility that any company other than Nikon can produce decent professional-level product! Take off yer Nikon blinders and do some research man! Send me any other CREDIBLE reviews that verifiy Dickso’s claims and I’ll take an OBJECTIVE look at them..until then BAHAHAHHHAAAAHAHHAHAHA!!

Well it looks as though not only DXO sucks and lick hairy balls, but now dpreview is going to start sucking the left one while DXO sucks the left. Or the other way around. It’s their choice. Not only do DXO ranks regarding bodies make no sense to anyone other than them and Nikon fans, neither do their lens rankings. As someone mentioned, the ver.2 of the 70-200 2.8 is ranked lower than ver.1? That alone should lose them all credibility with the camera world but oh no, knobs around the world continue to grovel at DXO’s moronic feet and call anyone who questions their retarded tests, well, retarded. Well, now you knobs can not only enjoy the worthless testing done by DXO but a site I fairly respected to some degree has partnered with them for their lens testing. YUP. dpreview. The source cited in this article comparing the mk3 and d800 is going to include DXO tests in their lens reviews. Well it’s clear what we all have to do. We have to go back to the good old days where we just walked into a camera store and bought a fucking camera. We did not spend weeks and months on review sites (of turds who don’t know what they’re talking about anyway) and endless hours on forums (instead of actually shooting and printing and enjoying our photos). There is no longer any fucking point whatsoever looking at online reviews or tests. Apparently everyone is bought and biased to such a degree we can no longer separate the bullshit from the bull. I wonder what review site DXO will worm their way into next. I know this is a banner day for all you fools who think DXO is the holy grail but in truth, it’s just another in a long list of sad days to come when we can no longer find an honest review of our camera gear.

..so what you’re saying is that all the supposedly credible camera review websites are in bed with a manufacturer and unable to provide objective review/analysis agenda because they’ve been ‘bought out’ by one of the big corps..pretty pathetic if true and a sad reflection of where the internet is headed..

Not so much a manufacturer but more of a “bringer of truth” (DXO). I may be exaggerating when I say “all” but it’s getting tougher by the day to find a clear, concise and unbiased test result of equipment. First, let’s forget the “I’m a photographer and here’s my blog about what you should buy and why” sites. If I were to have such a blog, everyone would buy Canon. That’s not right. Plus, I don’t have the resources to test raws from every camera and neither do most of these bloggers. They present jpegs that have nothing to do with what can be done with the camera and various lens combinations under various conditions. So that leads us to sites like dpreview. Now, I’m not saying they suck balls yet, just starting to lick the left one. They are not going to rely on DXO for lens test results, but merely add that data to their own. Many hail this as good, some like me as bad. Regardless of how I feel of course, dpreview will do as they wish. Personally, I don’t think any facts about equipment should be presented unless you yourself have done the tests. That’s why people used to like dpreview. It wasn’t just another site that posted links and snips from other test sites and posted them all together as a “review”. I can’t wait till they decide to post the DXO test results in their camera reviews too. Hell, I could start my own camera review site then by just linking to all the DXO tests and ta-da…I’ll be rewarded on my camera blog with millions of sucker hits every day too. That rant all done, I’ll admit that I’ve perused a lot of review sites in my day BUT I’ve always read everything (like anything I read on the internet) with a grain of salt so large it could choke a t-rex. But yes, it’s sad that (if it ever really existed in the first place) unbiased reviews may be joining the t-rex. One thing’s for sure, DXO will continue to suck balls and the world will become a crappier place for it.

..this guy claims to be an advanced amateur but his review is pretty informative and well put together from a laymans’ perspective..his conclusion certainly doesn’t suggest the D800 is a complete piece of junk (as this blogs’ creator would have us believe) but it does indicate that the 5D3 is a better ‘realworld’ camera..he also suggests that full-frame sensor video from the 5D3 is not much better than that produced by his 4 year old 550D wiith APS-C sensor..in another video (if you watch carefully) the 550D video actually looks to be superior to that from the D800..this (independant YouTube reviews) may now be the only way to get a somewhat objective opinion in the obviously corrupt world of ‘professional’ internet camera reviews..

..so let’s break down what’s happening here..what’s being revealed is that all the supposedly credible camera review websites have been hijacked by the manufacturerrs as conduits to move product..it obviously takes an investment in qualified personnel as well as expensive equipment to produce a professional camera review website..how do they pay for it and maybe make a few bucks?..the answer is advertising of course..so if Canon is willing to provide megabucks to advertise the 5d3 you’re reviewing on your site and Nikon has invested elsewhere then the pressure would be on to bias the review/comparison to favour the Canon product at the risk of losing them as a client..how do you counter this?..you need an organisation of professional photographers to get together and put together a website that is dedicated to objectivity so that the people accessing the site are getting a clean view of where this digital revolution is heading..it would require professional photographers working in the field to submit articles describing how well the equipment they are using is delivering ..it would require all tests done with a respected third party lense (ie Sigma) so that we can see what different bodies/sensors can do in the same lighting situation..not difficult really..,buy one lense and rent different bodies for your tests..allow only third party advertisers (ie B&H) and contributions from members to pay the overhead for what ideally would be a non-profit organization..a pipedream I know but something has to be done to correct this or the prosumer will eventually lose trust in the internet and go back to reading photography magazines to keep up with this rapidly evolving technology..

Or you could go better than a 5D MK3 and get a Nikon D600, with the 14-24,24-70,70-200 and a couple of good primes. Actually, with the money you’ll save by not buying the second rate Canon, you’ll get a good lens.

Canon L series lenses blow the Nikkor lense away. If you want to be a professional buy the 5d mk3, if you want to be an amateur go for the D800. I’m a BA degree with honours professional with 24 years experience and moved from Nikon film SLR’s to Canon DSLR’s because Canon is the Rolls Royce of the camera world while Nikon is BMW. Both good but D800 is a gimmick and not as good as the 5D mk3 in the REAL world.

..you appear to be on to something here..although this blog is about the 5D3 vs D800, FC fails to acknowledge that several sources (besides DXO) suggest that the D600 shoots clearly superior images (yet is over 1k cheaper) than the 5D3..we ‘clearly’ need a comment from FC on this to validate this blog..

I loved your review. I agree with most of things. But I do think at low isos d800 has a very good dynamic range, you can really pull lots noise free shadow details. I wish canon does something in dynamic range front. Btw you should try your luck in stand up comedy 🙂

..that’s what FC is saying here..the D800 is basically a studio camera designed to be used in controlled lighting conditions at ISO 100 in a studio on a tripod ..in that situation you will get better results than are attainable with a 5D3 (which is a far superior ‘realworld’ camera)..he rightly points out that all evidence suggests DXO are working with Nikon to degrade anything Canon and can’t be taken seriously..that being said what you won’t get here is a validation of anything Nikon as FC all but admits he’s a Canonfanboy (if he is a pro he’s invested heavily in Canon glass) and won’t (for instance) acknowledge that the D600 is almost the ‘realworld’ equal to the 5D3 for substantially less money..I’ve invested in a ‘budget’ Canon APS-C system and as my business grows will eventually need to go with a full-frame system (hence my interest in this blog)..right now I’m leaning towards a D600 w/14-70 as a starter package but I’m in no hurry and will wait for Canon’s answer to the D600 before I move on anything..

..from what I’ve seen of it so far I’d have to agree..if the D600 had an articulated viewfinder I’d probably be shooting with one now..that’s the feature I’m looking for in a full-frame at an affordable price point..that camera doesn’t appear to exist yet but both Nikon and Canon have the resources to produce it so until they deliver one I’m good with the results my 60D package is delivering..

..I previously posted a slider test shot with a 60D at auto settings (1600 ISO cap) which shows surprisng dynamic range for an entry-level prosumer DSLR..it would be nice to see more posts of work done by the supposedly professional photograhpers participating in this blog that actually validates their claims..when I move to a full-frame system I’ll probably replicate and post that shot so I(we) can see what that extra 3-4k investment is delivering..now that it’s obvious (by his silence) that FC is a bonafide Canonfanboy (who likes to swear a lot) who has brought to our attention that DXO is most likely Nikon-biased and the 5D3 is a better ‘realworld’ camera (but little else), it’s time to see some examples of of the quality the ‘superior’ competition is capable of producing because otherwise this blog may be ‘timed-out’ and now has little else to offer in terms of exploring where full-frame sensor technology is headed..

Tell me something. You go to a restaurant and are enjoying the best steak of your life. But, a friend sitting at an adjacent table offers you a piece of his steak. OMG! It’s even juicier, tastier than what you what you thought was absolute perfection prior to the comparison. Really, what’s the point with the comparisons? Neither camera is a piece of junk. And, what proof are you offering that you didn’t intentionally skew the results? Talk about someone needing to grow up….

..a JPEG is fine if accompanied by a ‘tweaked’ RAW version of the same image that illustrates the dynamic range contained within that image..for me what the camera does with factory auto settings is a good measure of the quality of the camera/sensor because in ‘realworld’ siuations there may not be an opportunity to correct things (for instance) like the flawed AWB (green tint) that plagues the D800…apparently it is correctable in the manual settings but who wants to waste time dealing with it in non-studio situations just to match what the 5D3 does right out of the box..

I have a 5D mark 3 and my business partner has a D800. It started as a personal preference but the L series canon lenses blast the nikons out the water, so much so my business partner is selling his virtually new D800 to buy a 5D mark 3 (& he’s a Nikon fan). A lot of you rant about high ISO usage but in a church where you aren’t allowed to use flash, the 5D on 5000 ISO with a 70-200mm f2.8 ISM L series 2 has no equal in the D800 arsenal. And the confetti shots with 6fps also beat the D800. Real camera, used by a professionally qualified, 24 year experienced photographer (not you geeky Mega Pixel Amateurs). The Canon is like a pure racing car, designed for power to weight performance with outstanding handling, breaking and aerodynamics against the Nikon, an American muscle car that can go fast in a straight line then end up in a hedge at the first bend or blow up after a short distance. Too much power (Mega Pixels) and no where near as good lenses (tyres and breaks). REAL WORLD, 5D MK3 is the professionals choice, D800 the Amateaur look at me with my massive over kill mega pixel never to be used above a 20″x16″ canvas choice! 5D super fit professional athlete, D800 steroid muscle freek with a small penis and long term health problems. Canon purposely created a perfected version of its 5D range. Nikon went down the gimmick route. Bullshit for bull shitters so it’s simple. If you’re a true pro buy the canon. If you’re a wanna be amateur by the Nikon but be aware, us true professionals will laugh at you for choosing poorly. You either have it or you don’t. And I photograph her majesty the queen to name drop but one of my clients so beat that!!!

Thanks Chuck. I’m a professional from the UK and thought long and hard about which upgrade to have. In the old days of film I did use Nikon SLR’s and Mamiya medium format and Toya 5″x4″ & 10″x8″ Sinar large format. I bought a 20D DSLR first during my transitional period then the 5d Mk 1 which was awesome at the time. I didn’t need a 1D as I’m not a sports photographer. The camera paid for itself after a couple months and I took on average 100,000 images per year so really gave it a hammering. It never faltered and is still a back up after 300,000 shots. The Mark 3 is a massive leap forward from the 1 & the minor changes from the mk2 where exactly what ticked the box’s for me. My business partner ranted over the D800 but I didn’t like it’s ergonomics, the overkill of mega pixels (who needs them in the real world let alone the storage capacity, mac or PC upgrades, software upgrades etc etc you need, which outways the cost differences amateurs also rant about). Then there’s the beautiful L series lenses. True works of art. Especially the standard 24-105mm & the white 70-200 USM f2.8 series 2 IS which is a peach of a lens and a crisp as frosty morning. I know we all have personal preferences and product loyalty but my Nikon loving business partner has conceded after a hard fought battle that the Canon just works in a professional environment. I won’t say the D800 is a bad camera, just like I wouldn’t say Spain isn’t a bad holiday destination but it’s no Hawaii or Bora Bora like the Canon. The final punch has been landed, the Nikon is on the deck and the count has reached 10. The Canon stands with its arms in the air and the heavyweight champions belt is firmly placed around its waist. Need I say more Chuck?

The link picture is indeed clean. However, who needs to shoot at 25600 iso in studio situations on a tripod? Which brings me to this MSNR you speak off. Again, this feature sounds great but only in a tripod mounted situation where the camera is held stable. And again, why would you need to shoot in this condition at high ISO’s? The D600 is still very clean at 6400iso, and if it’s darker than 6400 is suitable for, I’ll accept that I’ll need to use flash (which the D600 has onboard, handy little feature that), or tripod mount.

This looks and reads like another load of bullshit from a bullshitter. If you’re a true pro, (i.e. – Dan McNally), you’ll buy whatever the fuck you want, not listen to some wanker Canon fanboy. I could write some anonymous, unverifiable, horseshit pro-canon story here too, will you take that as gospel as well, Fakey? Seriously? You fanboys will believe only what you want. I’ve had both systems, now I only use Nikon, because it is simply better.

And yeah, I bet you regularly shoot at 5000 iso and expect great quality images, maybe of Her Majesty perhaps? Real pro….

After the ISO 100 Noise destroyed a lot of high-contrast images im glad that i finally got my stuff sold and be a proud owner of a Sony Alpha 99

That is awesome. I have flip-screen and it is not in the way not does it influence the robust beeing of the camera. Im glad that the Sony guys are able to build cameras with flip screen stable (Canon seems to be not capable of).

Also i have In-Body image stabilisation, i have no Noise at ISO 100 and an incredible dynamic.

Just everything is awesome at this camera and that at a lower price than the 5D Mark III

Not that the 5D Mark III is bad, just so incredible overpriced. At Sony i get “everything” for 2800 €, at Canon i get much less for 3200 €, but one thing i get more. Noise at ISO 100

piss of Canon and thank your for letting me waste money in the thinking that the 5D Mark III is a good camera.

Incredible, the Sony A99 doesnt noise visible more even having a fixed translucent mirror and a higher resolution. Im so fucking glad to finally got rid of my 5D Mark III

Sure you can say the Sony is a shitty camera, but i havent found _any_ disadvantage, not one. But a lot of advantages for less money.

I highly doubt that there is any lasting arguments against the A99, but there are against the 5D Mark III. this stupid ISO 100, im still having bad dreams in case of that 😥 im so glad that when i wake up i can just take my A99 and see that it is possible to have photos which doesnt have Noise at ISO 100

Also its good to know that i can configure every button how i like and not how Canon thinks it makes sense. Also the Sensor is still tracking subjects even when they are out of every AF-Field, shooting moving subjects just got 20% easier in a 10 seconds flat!

..even if the Sony is as superior at 100 ISO as you claim you’re still compromising the quality and range of available glass the Canon system offers but as I said, talk is cheap..you’ve obviously used both cameras..why not post a 100 ISO image shot with the 5D3 and an image shot in a similar lighting situation with the A99 that validates the noise issue you have with the Canon because bottomline ‘money’ talks and bs walks..

The 5D Mark III is btw. not the only camera, _every_ camera from Canon have this “issue”.

I wrote Canon about this and asked for a price reduce as this is a defect in my oppinion. Also the camera is advertised with “Sensor produces 2 ISO Stops less noise”.

As this is obvious not true (JPEG have 2 ISO Stops less noise compared to the Mk2 but the advertisement clearly says the Sensor have 2 ISO Stops less noise, not the JPEG processing) and a lie in my oppinion i also told that Canon.

They just said i should send in the Mk3 for a check, they wont say anything until i sent in the camera.

As my local photo dealer could not give me the full price back for the camera as soon i send it in, i did not do it. I doubt that sending in would change anything. I doubt Canon develops a complete whole new sensor just for me.

The noise is best visible when pushing the shadows, but on some images i was able to see the noise _wihtout_ pushing any shadows.

This here is a good example shot at ISO 100 with the Tamron SP 70-300

look at the bottom left

This is _not_ accaptable for a camera for this price.

Its hard to reproduce this shot but you can download A99 RAWs from imaging-resource and push the shadows up to +3EV, you wont see any noise. Take the identical RAW-File from the 5D Mk3 and push the shadows up to +3EV, as much noise as at ISO 25’600 inside the shadows.

No Multi-Shot Noise Reduction
No Sensor Steady Shot
Nikkor Glasses are for sure not the best (think of the 24-120 or the 70-300, horrible!)
Nikkor Glasses with large focal length and image stabilisation are incredible expensive, with a A99 you pay only the half because you can buy a lense with 500mm and without image stabilisation as you already have it.

Win for Sony i guess, i would choose a 6D over the D600 just for the MFNR as this feature just overweights the other marginal advantages of the D600. It makes ISO 25’600 usable like ISO 6400

I presume by MSNR you’re talking about image noise. In which case, the 6D is a piece of shit compared to the brilliance that is the Sony sensor in the D600. Go have a look at this, http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikon-d600/13, and compare your 6D to the D600 with all NR turned off. Now click on the graph. Notice anything? Is this a true indication of SNR?

High-ISO Noise is random, so the Camera takes (for example) 6 Shots and calculate them together to eleminate noising pixels. As the noise is random you have a very good chance that the pixel you want is not noising in one of those 6 shots. That gives you about 2 Stops of ISO in term of noise.

Btw. even when you turn NR Off, there is still Noise Reduction applied, with both cameras. So this comparison is 100% useless, you can only compare noise in RAW. Everything else is comparing “JPEG Engine” or “Noise Reduciont” but not “Noise”

The link picture is indeed clean. However, who needs to shoot at 25600 iso in studio situations on a tripod? Which brings me to this MSNR you speak off. Again, this feature sounds great but only in a tripod mounted situation where the camera is held stable. And again, why would you need to shoot in this condition at high ISO’s? The D600 is still very clean at 6400iso, and if it’s darker than 6400 is suitable for, I’ll accept that I’ll need to use flash (which the D600 has onboard, handy little feature that), or tripod mount.

I did some days ago to demonstrate this feature to someone else. The 6D have about 0,6 EV less noise, so the 6D would look a bit better here (but have a different MFNR algorithm, so not 100% sure but 99%)

With a normal shot at 25 600 with my A99 this image would be 100% lost as nearly _every:_ Noise reduction fails on this specific light situations i have in this image here. I made a lot of tests with my 5D3 back then and at ISO25600 the NR completely failed as soon the light conditions were like this. So MFNR saved this image (even when its just a test shot)

The Sigma 24-70 EX DG HSM doesnt have any image stabilisation, so this image shows that the SteadyShot from Sony and the MFNR are working good. I have more shots from the building itself where you can see that its 100% tick sharp, all sharpness is lost due to noise, not to shake.

This must be written by a geeky “Mega Pixel Amateurs at best” (what ever it means). So now I will try to be one too
If you would like to have a superior DR and shadow recovery from low ISO which is preferred in landscape and LR shots, then even my 4 1/2 year old Sony a900 is making a new 5D MkIII jealous. And talk about gimmicks! my Sony don’t even take video! A real no gimmick camera.

..and therein lies my conundrum..I want to stay with Canon when I move to a full-frame system but they do appear to be having a problem with excessive noise at low ISO (not to mention no articulatable viewfinder offerings) ..no doubt they’ll eventually solve it but Sony appears to be already there..if only they had the glass to match the Canon arsenal..

The assholes DXO has been paid by Nikon to fake all these numbers, I notice like year ago..
piece of crap website with false statements & results… Btw, I returned my DXO software and got my money back, stay away from this idiots..

This is totally Bullshit as it does not reflect any useful information at all. We all know that evaluating lens is a much harder work. And there are many factors to evaluate a lens not just about sharpness. Sites like “www.photozone.de, http://www.slrgear.com, http://www.lenstip.com” have been doing great job regarding the lens test.
Most of the lens at DXO mark are rated below or close to average (inlcuding a lot of L lenses)
Let me guess! The NIKON Lens will have the highest score just like their cameras….
Fuck you DXO. That is enough to brainwash people. The said fact is that more and more people believe and rely on DXO score, including Dpreview.com. How said is that!

This is very funny blog. The reviewer who can only use a words – fuck, fucking, moron etc. You are a Canon fan boy who just pick the good about 5d3 and a bad about D800 and did a comparison. What about looking at objective review and tests (yours never will be), like this one:http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/nikon-d800/nikon-d800A.HTM

If you look at the high ISO compared 5D3 vs D800 you can clearly see that high ISO handling is different, they have different approach to sharpening. As you can see on the fabric there is more detial. Can you see it? Do you have the eyes you talked about? Super!

(I know you can not understand it, I bet you can only speak English and only “fucking English”)

As it was pointed out you have to up scale the 5D3 not down scale, but you are an amateur who try to do something absolutely useless.

Maybe you do not understand me, because my language differ from yours so I try to translate it: You can fucking fuck your reviews, comparisons and this whole fucking site, because you are a moron. Try to read what others have written to you and try to figure out what are you doing wrong, but I bet it will be impossible for you because your IQ can be somewhere around 40-50.

People generally come here to read the insane rantings of the notorious Fake Chuck, mainly for the entertainment value. If you took this shit as fact you’d be as stupid as he is. Anybody that has had an interest in photography for more than 10 days know Nikon is far superior to Canon shit. This blog is just good for laughs

It is just a camera.
Relax.
Sell everything and buy a Pentax or paint some pictures!
Bob Ross style. I always do that if I am that nervous… ^^
Btw I own a D800 and like the Canon stuff esp. the MK IIi a lot as well.
My heart rate is still normal! 🙂
Why fighting this stupid Nikon / Canon Tech battle? Wake up!!!
Learn sth about composition and timing. That does the difference. Not a single fucking ISO grain!

Shut the fuck up and take pictures. Only fucking trolls and idiots take their time to compare this shit. If you were any good, you can take amazing shots with a point and shoot. If you are any good you wouldn’t be doing these pointless tests but rather out taking pictures.

Canon fanboys are the funniest 😀 retarded, but very funny. You can’t argue with numbers, it’s like banging your head off a wall because some site, say, Rotten tomatoes, dissed your faourite film … retarded.

..if you can get by the emotional f-bomb laden ‘rhetoric’ all that’s being pointed out here is that DXO appears to be Nikon-biased which is evidenced by their posting images from both cameras which clearly show the 5D3 to be superior in noise and detail at anything above ISO 800 but they post numbers that indicate otherwise…that being said what I get from this is the D800 is the superior ‘studio’ camera whereas the 5D3 beats it hands-down in ‘realworld’ situations..I guess I must be losing it..

This is for sure not the case. The results of DxO are correct, just how you read them is important.

The downscale every image to 8MP, so the D800 have much more space to compensate noise while downscaling than the 5D3

Also they value “usable” dynamic, not overall dynamic.

The overall dynamic of the 5D3 is much higher, but they dont mesure it because its really very noisy in the shadows. You have to apply noise reduction to make this dynamic usable, so they dont count it.

The result of DxO is correct and not Nikon Baised as every camera have a better result (also Sony, Pentax and so on).

You can not say the result of DxO is wront, only that they dont give anything usefull.

For example take the complete noise-free Dynamic. The D800 have about 9,5 EV completely noise-free dynamic where the 5D3 have 7,7 EV completely noise-free dynamic.

For me personally, the completely noise-free dynamic is what i care about. Not everybody needs it, most people are fine with a tiny bit of noise, but i often have to take a 15% crop of an image and you can clearly see any noise in the dynamic then if you print it.

Also the dynamic is measured at ISO 100, the dynamic of the D800 is going down _very_ fast, at ISO 400 the 5D3 should be already better than the D800.

So its all a mixed thing and its all about what you really need (do you really need 100% noise-free dynamic, does a tiny bit of NR hurt you?) but the results of DxO are not wrong!

..appreciate that comprehensive breakdown of the numbers..I’ll take a second look..it’s the ISO 100 comparison that I actually meant to refer to..above that the Canon appears superior but there may be more to it..over to you FC..

All you fuckers here, really you slowly start to fuck me up with your fucking fuck shit.

Every day i get those fucking emails telling me that some fucker wrote more fucking shit to fuck me up. Its fucking enough now. Everything is said, this is fucking just a fucking comment area and not a fucking fuck bulletin fuck board.

If i get any of those fucking emails again just to tell me there is more fuck going on over im really going to fuck you all.

fucking DxO is not wrong, they just dont show what you fucking expect
the fucking 5D3 is fuckingly noise in the shadows even at iso 100, even fucking dpreview and fucking imaging-resource made deep review about this fucking issue. That is fucking up the numbers at DxO.

If you dont like the fucking result of fucking DxO, dont fucking look at it.

The fucking D800 have a fucking bad noise reduction which make the fucking jpeg look like fucking pain in the ass. If you downscale a fucking raw to fucking 22 megapixels it will have the same or even less noise then the fucking 5D3

here, i made a fucking comparison from dprevie a time ago

Left is the fucking 5D3 and right the also fucking D800

you can reproduce that fucking yourself with the fucking RAW of dpreviw.

After noise reduction there is fucking nearly no difference. D800 have fucking bit more noise but fucking bit more detail. The fucking same result in the end but higher dynamic range.

But the D800 have fucking fuck controls and its fucking annoying to develop the fucking 36MP of the D800. The 5D3 have fucking noise in the shadows.

I bought the fucking fuck Sony A99, it have fucking more noise than the 5D3 but also nearly no difference after noise reduction so i fucking fuck not care and just take fucking photos from my fucking live and fucking landscapes.

..nice subtle deployment of the f-bomb (FC you can learn a few things from this guy)..if you check the images he posts they’re pretty fucking close at high ISO (although I give the edge to the 5D3)..you make some good points but where are the A99 images?

I can still not download the ISO 25’600 RAW from dpreview but as i own it i can say its about 0,5 EV more noise than the 5D3.

I tested with imaging-resource samples and the noise level of the A99 is about the same of the D800 (at 36MP).

When using MFNR the A99 blows the 5D3 away and i use MFNR for everything over 6400 (except for moving subject 😉 ) so i dont care at all 😀

In the end the comparison of noise is really not interesting. If i adjust the NR of the D800 that the resulting image have the same amount of noise then the 5D3 image, i have only a non-visible loss of details which are easily compensated by the 36 Megapixels.

In the end i have just the same image. The A99 doesnt have much more megapixels (24MP vs 22MP), but still enough to compensate the detail loss caused by higher noise reduction. Nobody wont ever see the difference without scrolling to 200%, and that is… well lets say useless.

I highly recommend RawTherapee >=4.0.9.143 (current is 4.0.9.212) for Noise Reduction as it is just incredible awesome. You can push all NR Settings to 100% and then have a slider called “Details”.

So after NR is at 100% (really less details but no noise) you can push the details slider up and the NR is automatically weakened where the algorithm detects details. So in the shadows more NR is applied than on scenes where “details” are and you can put the slider up to the amount of details you want to have. Just awesome. That way i created the test images on http://www.ignaz-foto.org and as you can see, the images have all details where details are needed (look at the bayleys bottle or at the money)

But as said, in the end the comparison of Noise is really boring cause after the NR they look all more or less the same (external NR, not the In-Body).

That is why i decided to buy the A99 even if the Noise is about 0,5 EV more. After a lot of tests i decided that the resulting image istn really worse than those of the D800 and 5D3 so the other features are just more important to me.

But as soon as i can download the Samples from dpreview, i will include them for sure.

Sony and Zeiss have everything whats _really_ needed, the rest you can get from Sigma and Tramron

The Sigma EX Lenses are all first-class, also the Tamron SP lenses are from very good quality (just take the new Tamron SP 70-200 f/2.8)

Also Samyang have some good lenses. For example there 24mm f/1.4 or 14mm f/2.8 (50mm f/1.2 to come in 2014).

The only disadvantage of the Samyan lenses is that they are fully manual, but with a Sony thats no problem. Image Stabilisation is in the Body and you have Fokus Peeking in the View Finder.

In the end, all lenses you need are there and they are all at very high quality. Sure the Tamron SP 24-70 can not beat the Canon EF II 24-70 L lense, but its really close for less then the half price. Its agiain bout if you look at your photos at 200%.

For example i use the Sigma EX DG HSM 24-70 f/2.8 and in real-world shots i never seen any difference to my Canon L I 24-70 f/2.8, especially in real-world shots. The only real difference is that the Sigma doesnt have OS, but i dont care 😛 😀

Personally I’ll take the Cannon every time, and it has nothing to do with some stupid noise test… It’s because I enjoy it for my style of shooting and for the results I personally am able to get with it due to my familiarity with it and my existing lens range. People who get caught up in this bullshit end up being nothing more than camera owners rather than photographers. I’ve seen photos taken with 8 megapixel point and shoot cameras that make many “professionals” who use high end camera’s work look like… well… complete shit!

GAS (Gadget Accumulation Syndrome) A man who rely’s on his tools rather than his talent!

I am presently considering buying either a nikon or canon system moving from the untouchable film Contax cameras with Zeiss lenses. I can say without reservation that your perspective on issues, revealed by your incredibly perverse use of profanity to express your point of view, could be better expressed by a primate. And that is an insult to the intelligence of our related cousins. Your mindless rant does nothing to contribute to any meaningful discussion on the issue of choice of an appropriate camera system based on individual needs with a balanced argument. But hey, I’ve already transcended your level of intelligence with my comments so best stop now before you start banging on your cage.

you’re a real whacko retard jerk-off! how can you be sooo lame in favor of canon and pissing
against Nikon and DxO? Ahh, got ya – you’re using the Jehova DSLR brand! =)
You*ve never thought about that its FUCKING unfair to compare 22 to 36 MP on FF Sensor,
ya fuckin be kidding me, sucker! compare it with the D600/610, you bold egg!

Honestly if you spend more time taking pictures, than posting useless rants, maybe this all stuff will make sense.This solves nothing.DPR will not change their web page,and you will remain angry person.I am canon fan boy and since nikon d70 was made and I compared it with 20D, I did not look back.Same thing I suggest to you.Close some chapters in your life and keep taking good photos.You proved your point…

I 100% agree with Chuck and fuck the rest of the opponents who owns Nikon and refusing to admit the fact.. Lot of sites saying the same that Cannon is better than Nikon. Good work Chuck, keep posting your analysis 🙂

Hello everyone i want to share my experience.I also recommend to everyone please check camera first *(itself) then take final decision. I also search lot of website. people compare and telling advantage and disadvantage. But i was so confused.Then i decide to check my self. Now I am REALLY happy find out best DSLR THAT is Canon 5D Mark 3. Mark 3 better than d800/800e 36.3 MP. They have just announced 36.3 MP but not really at 200 zoom too much noise. 5D Mark 3 at 200 zoom not noise.colour,contrast,WB,sharpness superb *(overall quality superb)…… but Nikon D800 / D800e are not so good that i was expecting from nikon even 36MP camera in this world.I dont know just for advertising or some attraction but not real. I am very disappoint from Nikon. First I want to buy Nikon after lot of research on internet but this is not true just check results,review and comments on Internet. Please Please….check your self then Buy you desire camera…..Best Of Luck….

This is the best blog I’ve read in a long time! I started questioning DXOMarks scores but not with Canon/Nikon but M43. DXO never says how they test the lenses, and why does a lens for a Panasonic M43 camera act like a totally different lens on an Olympus with a Pansonic sensor? Every Olympus test seems slanted as hell. Sharpness for every lens on the GX7 is so-so, but the equivalent Olympus its drastically sharper? Others have questioned this and I think it has to do with how their upsampling/downsampling the test images when comparing. The same lens performs drastically different (eg edge softness). Im going to stick with DPReview.com from now on.

You are insane, thats why they use the Nikon D800 on Showtime’s Dexter ? And it looks sublime (creative choice after testing many cameras). You dont know what youre talking about (and I have the 5 D Mark III and love it)

Hey you, fake piece of feces, I bet even with a good camera, you couldn’t make a half decent photo. A Canon troll with no talent, not even for trolling! Who ever gave you an idea to talk about cameras, you dimwitted piece of manure!? Go, find a rock and KILL YOURSELF with it!